Being a part of my generation of Indians, there are sometimes when I feel lucky and gratified to find myself a witness to a propitious phase of rapid economic development in my city. That the scent of this 'progress' has not permeated beyond the urban epidermis into the rural landscape of my country will be of some concern in the near future, with buzzwords like 'inclusive growth' keeping the thinkers and planners busy.
But in an interesting NDTV article, a grad student questions whether these current metrics of growth are reasons to quote and be proud about. She doesn't get into developmental economics and analyze what these metrics really reflect; she is rather blunt in asking us Indians whether we have any reason to be proud about the direction our country is taking. It's not a crime to be 'confident' she says, but fears that this confidence is changing too quickly into arrogance in some quarters - arrogance, that neither has any basis in reality nor advances the interests of 'Brand India' in any way.
In the true spirit of Monty Python, we Indians like to always look on the bright side of life. When we have master campaigners in parties like the BJP, it isn't difficult for most to live under the delusion that India is 'shining':
I would still like to question the author's premise which made her conveniently assume the naive homogeneity of the Indian voice over these issues. But I cannot help but acknowledge the bitter truth in the following words, where she harpoons this ineluctable diatribe against a nation she believes is counting its chickens much too early referring to our collective dream of becoming a South-Asian superpower:
But in an interesting NDTV article, a grad student questions whether these current metrics of growth are reasons to quote and be proud about. She doesn't get into developmental economics and analyze what these metrics really reflect; she is rather blunt in asking us Indians whether we have any reason to be proud about the direction our country is taking. It's not a crime to be 'confident' she says, but fears that this confidence is changing too quickly into arrogance in some quarters - arrogance, that neither has any basis in reality nor advances the interests of 'Brand India' in any way.
In the true spirit of Monty Python, we Indians like to always look on the bright side of life. When we have master campaigners in parties like the BJP, it isn't difficult for most to live under the delusion that India is 'shining':
For instance, if you challenge the idea of a rising India with the dogged optimists by pointing out the Gujarat genocide, you are immediately reminded that Gujarat is also one of the most industrially advanced and administratively efficient states in India. If you point to the fact that most of our engineering graduates are not employable you are immediately reminded that India still produces the highest number of engineering graduates in the world.
If you suggest that Indian democracy is so criminalised that it has killed good governance you are told that no other country sends a billion people to the ballot box. This is the new half-full approach to life but it tends to gloss over anything that points in the other direction and brands anyone who says so as a skeptic and a kill-joy.
I would still like to question the author's premise which made her conveniently assume the naive homogeneity of the Indian voice over these issues. But I cannot help but acknowledge the bitter truth in the following words, where she harpoons this ineluctable diatribe against a nation she believes is counting its chickens much too early referring to our collective dream of becoming a South-Asian superpower:
But a great power is fundamentally supposed to be able to positively influence events, something we can't do even in our own backyard at the moment. Afghanistan is a mess, Pakistan is losing control over itself, Bangladesh can't decide when to have elections, Nepal is in transition and Sri Lanka in civil war.
India has little or no control over events in its own neighbourhood, let alone projecting its power around the world. Besides even when the chance arose, India could not take a bold stand. It refused to condemn China on its actions in Tibet and it did business with the Burmese junta at the height of the crackdown on pro-democracy protests.
8 comments:
reminded me of this article i had read a few months back:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2351533.cms
i am not sure about the super power, but one thing i feel is that india is developing not as one nation but as two seperate nations in urban and rural india. sudeep chakrabarti, paints a rather grim picture of this in "red sun" which incidentally, i have just finished reading and you may borrow if required..
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14680479&page=1
Came across this interview of Chakrabarti; seemed very comprehensive. Yes, I would like to borrow that book when I meet you :)
More than the asymmetry of the growth i am worried about its nature.
I had once read Ramachandra Guha's essays on the history of environmentalism in the west and the east and the radically different approaches that became necessary when blanket copying of western models turned out to be absolutely counterproductive.
I think we require compeltey different paradigms of growth and parameters that show it. We need to focus on large inclusive projects and social growth than industry.
I don't believe that the planet is designed for such a huge population living at first world levels. We need to define our own targets.
A happiness versus economic growth survey showed that economic growth only affects happiness indices till a point after which the happiness levels table of and become largely independent of GDP.
producing malls and a consumer lifestyle is not what India or the environment needs.
@kp: interesting points!
@kp:
i think we are far from providing first world level standards for everyone. I am just saying that "roti, kapda aur makaan" for everyone should be our prime concern.
Environmental issues should change our methods and not the objective.
i do not think you can avoid malls and consumer lifestyle in a free market economy. although if that is a concern, we need to find who needs to change, the government, the businessmen or the people?
Then maybe i am against a free market economy. providing for the masses is what we should be aiming at, that and education and infrastructre.
Also a consumer lifestyle is not necessarily an outcome of free market economics. After the first world war when there was surplus production in the factories of the west, the consumer economy was constructed to keep the factories running and the masses restive. All this thought is based on an idea that people are inherently destructive and thus need this level of control.
personally i am struggling myself to see if this last point may be true but i am held back by the though that ppl are given to doing positive actions enmasse too.
But we can defintely say that a free market economy need not necessarily be consumerist. It can alternately produce things of value to the ppl instead of creating the value or generating items of apparent value.
A great read! Through kp's comments as well! This looks like a place where I should read and not talk :)
@adidas- Thanks :). Of course you should definitely not hesitate to say anything you want to! Much appreciated
Post a Comment